Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Patrick McKeon, 1903 — 189 U.S. 508 · caselaw · US
General
New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Patrick McKeon
189 U.S. 508·Supreme Court of the United States·1903
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 611.
New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Patrick McKeon.
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, Connecticut.
Motions to dismiss or affirm, submitted April 20, 1903.
Decided April 27, 1903.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Judgment affirmed with costs and interest, on the authority of Wheeler v. New York etc. Railroad Company, 178 U. S. 321; New York and, New England Railroad Company v. Bristol, 151 U. S. 556; Arrowsmith v. Harmoning, 118 U. S. 194; Little Rock etc. Railway Company v. Worthen, 120 U. S. 97-102; Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U. S. 97, 105. See 53 Atl. Rep. 656.
Mr. Arthur M. Marsh for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Stiles Judson, Jr., for defendant in error.